Court denies bail to ex-director of Lodha Developers in Rs 181 crore land scam

Mumbai, A court here on Monday denied bail to former director of Lodha Developers, Rajendra Lodha, in a Rs 181 crore corporate land fraud case, saying such offences affects people's confidence in commercial and financial institutions.

Prima facie material collected during the course of investigation shows Lodha's alleged pivotal role in the conspiracy, Additional Sessions Judge P A Sable said.

The prosecution has alleged a systematic, well-planned economic conspiracy that spanned over a decade. Lodha misused his fiduciary authority as director to illegally sell company-owned lands to various developers at undervalued prices, the police said.


He conspired with multiple co-accused, including his son Sahil Lodha, for creating false and fabricated documents to make unauthorized land sales appear genuine.

As per the prosecution, the accused caused severe financial losses to the complainant company, currently quantified at over Rs 181 crores and expected to increase.

Lodha's lawyer, however, argued that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case.

He claimed Lodha's actions were strictly within the authority granted by the company's board of directors.

His lawyer pressed for bail, citing that Lodha suffers from serious conditions, including diabetes, hypertension, coronary artery disease, and has previously undergone bypass surgery.

The prosecution opposed the plea, labelling Lodha as the "principal architect" of the conspiracy.

It asserted further investigation is still actively ongoing and a crucial auditor's report is awaited.

The prosecution expressed serious concern that Lodha, given his influential position, could intimidate witnesses, many of whom are either former employees or poor agriculturists.

The court, after hearing both sides, said the allegations against the applicant are "undoubtedly serious in nature".

"The material collected during investigation, prima facie, discloses that the applicant is alleged to have abused the authority entrusted to him by entering into a series of unauthorised transactions relating to valuable immovable properties of the company in conspiracy with the co-accused," the order noted.

Judge Sable emphasized that economic offences involving breach of fiduciary obligations, and largescale diversion of valuable assets constitute a distinct class of offences.

It doesn't merely affect the complainant but "also the confidence of the public in commercial and financial institutions", the court remarked.

The court concluded that the prosecution's apprehension regarding witness tampering and potential interference with the ongoing investigation is well-founded.

Addressing the defence's medical concerns, the judge stated jail authorities are fully capable of ensuring the applicant receives appropriate care in accordance with the law.